Centre farmer. (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1875-1???, October 01, 1876, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Centre Farmer.
VOL. 2.
Prof. JNO. HAMILTON, State College,
B. F. SHAFFER, Walker,
Publishing Committee.
Officers of the Society for 1876 :
President—Joux A. Woopwarp, Howard.
Vice Presidents—GEN. Gro. BucnaNAN, of Gregg,
GEo. L. Pererg, of Union,
A. 8. Tieton, of Curtin,
SAMUEL Ginrinanp, of College.
Secretary & Treasurer—J. WESLEY (GEPHART, of
Librarian—Joux T. Jounsron, of Bellefonte.
Ewecutive Com.—J As, A. BEAVER, of Bellefonte,
Joux Risuer, of Benner,
JouN A. HUNTER, of Halfmoon,
LeoNArDp Ruong, of Potter,
Joux Hamirron, of College,
B. F. Suarrer, of Walker.
RN ———-
THE CENTRE FARMER will be issued
monthly, and is devoted exclusively to such
subjects as have a direct bearing upon the
interests of the farming community in gen-
Sociery in particular,
Terms Free, and Postage Prepaid.
To Advertisers.
The Centre Farmer will be published for
six months, with a total of twenty six thousand |
copies, and distributed, through the mails,
postage prepaid, to every farmer in the /
county, whose address can be obtained. The
object of its publication is to advertise, and |
oreate a renewed interest in the County Agri-,
cultural Suciety, and its annual fair, and no |
pains will bo spared to have it thorodgify
circulated. This makes it a very desirable
medium for that class of advertisers who
desire specially to reach the farming commu-
nity. We have still room for a limited num-
ber of advertisements which will be inserted
at the following rates: |
One eighth column.......ceevenicivnenniiiinnnes £600!
One fourth do ..... siribssensssirensiakisere we 10 00
One half do viens ardivpiives aieriisiany . 20 00
Whole do ..... ereiRe as Eien ah veecees 40 00
Howard, Centre Co., Pa.
——Our next Annual Fair will be held
on the Society's grounds, at Bellefonte,
on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday,
being the 3d, 4th and 6th days of Oce
tober, 1876.
Iniver Pills.
Dr. E. Greene's Liver Pills are always and '
only put up in OVAL boxes, not round—and |
have on the bottom of each and every box—
the name of the Sole Agents and Manufactu-
No. 6 Brockerhoff Row.
AF~See other advertisement in this paper-ga '
W. 8. WOLF & SON,
and Dealers in all kinds of
&C., &C., &C. |
ets, w
- and most experienced farmers.
farmers to be compelled
| against their neighbor's stock ? On this
At the Executive Committee meet-
ing held on the 8th of September, the
Superintendents of the respective De-
partment and the Judges for the differ-
ent classes were selected. For the lat-
ter duty only one person was chosen
for each class, and the gentlemen
named are empowered to make the
decisions in their respective classes
without selecting assistants, or if they
do not feel like assuming the sole re-
gponsibilivy they can call to their aid
two or more persons to assist them.
The following is a list of those appoin-
ted :
Cuier Marsnar—Samuel Gilliland, of Boals-
First Department—Stock—John
Second Department— Agricultural and Horticul-
tural Products—Christian Dale, jr., of Spring.
Third Department—Agricultural Implements,
de.—A. 8. Tipton, of Howard.
Fourth Department—Home Department.—Mrs.
M. B. J. Valentine and Mrs. George Valen-
tine, of Spring.
Fifth Department—Amusements—F. P. Blair,
Rishel, of
1. Horses for General Use—John McCoy, of
2. Horses for Heavy Draft—Henry Corniman,
of Miles.
3. Driving and Riding Horscs—J. D. Shugert,
' of Bellefonte.
4, Jacks and Mules—John Curtin, of Belle-
+5, Thoroughbred Cattle—James Keller, of
6. Grade and Native Cattle—Henry Beck, of
7. Working and Fat Cattle—Henry Moyer, of
inden Hall,
8. Dairy Cows on Trial—Daniel C. Keller, of
9. Swine—Hon. John H. Orvis, of Bellefonte.
10. Sheep—Isaiah Struble, of Walker.
11. Poultry—D. H. Rote, of Haines.
12. Pets—Theodore Deschner, of Bellefonte.
13. Field Crops—Jchn Grove, of Potter.
14. Flour and Meal—Jared B. Fisher, of
15. Vegetables—William Shortlidge, of Belle-
16. Fruits—Pres't. James Calder, of State
17. Agricultural Implements—Wm. C.
of College.
18. Furniture and Utensils for Farm, Dairy
+ and Household Use—George W. Campbell, of
Linden Hall.
19. Wagons and Carriages—Isaac Lose, of
20. Lumber and its Manufactures—Dr. Gi. F.
' Hoop, of Philipsburg.
21. Leather and its Manufactures—Thomas
Downing, of Bellefonte.
22, Iron and its Manufactures—Hon. John
Irwin, of Bellefonte.
23. Flowers and Designs—Prof. James Y.
McKee, of State College.
24, Wines, Pickles, Preserves, &c—John B.
Mitchell, of Ferguson,
25. Bread, Cake, Pastry, Butter, Honey, Sugar,
Meats, &ic—Balser Weber, of Howard.
26. Quilting, Needlework, Embroidery, dc—W,
W. Montgomery, of Bellefonte.
27. Fine Arts, Penmanship, #c—Prof. Henry
Meyer, of Miles.
3h dges are entitled to complimentary tick-
rich will be furnished on application to
the Secretary at his office at the entrance to
. the grounds.
- ING, &C.
Correspondent of the N. Y. Tribune,
An inquiry is made by a Pennsylva-
| nia farmer #8 to herding, or, in more
common words, keeping and maintain-
ing road" fences.
that has occupied the most serious and
thoughtful consideration of our best
his is a question
to fence
; ! subject there are various opinions; but
Roofing & Spouting a Specialty. I can plainly discover that there is a
growing feeling against road fences,
‘may safely say
ave been here 32 years, and think I
am an impartial
judge of the present and past condition
of the needs, wants and necessities of
our country, and the present views of
our farmers, Southern Wisconsin is
well timbered, and therefore farmers
could fence, as they have have done,
against their neighbor's stock. In the
early days of our settlement fences
were built of rails to protect the culti-
vated fields. This rule was the stand-
ard one until a few years since, when
farmers began to ask whether they
ought to fence against any other stock
than their own. The more this sub-
ject was examined and investigated,
the less apparent it became that a man
was only bound to fence against his
own stock. The law requires farmers
to build line fences, but nothing more.
It is a well settled principle in the law
of this State that the highway is only
for a public easement, for the purpose
of allowing the public to pass over it.
The adjoining owner parts with no
other interest, but to all intents and
purposes, occupies, pays taxes on, con-
trols the two rods wide taken for a
public highway as much as any part
of his farm. This being the case it is
clear that the public have no other in-
terest in the highway or road other
than a public easement or a right to
ass over it. The public being by law
ih our highest courts have adjudicated
and decided) only entitled to use our
farms as common or public highways,
it clearly follows that no fence is re-
quired to protect us from the damage
of the public. A road is only a right
of way for specific purpose, and who-
ever passes over it must see that no
damage is done to the one who owns,
pays taxes on, and gives the right of
way. “The question now presented is,
Shall farmers in the United States take
up and not build road and line fences ?
For one, I say, let every man fence
against and take care of his own stock,
but not that of his neighbors.
The subject of fencing, or of taking
care of stock with but little or no fenc-
ing, is probably as well understood by
the farmers of Nebraska and adjoining
States as by any other people; Here
are found farmers from all parts of this
country and many foreign countries. I
do not think there is on an average as
much fencing on the quarter-section
(160 acres) farms in Nebraska as will
be found on the ten-acre farms in New-
England. Why is it? It cannot be
the extra cost of fencing, for the hedge
fence, which is the cheapest of all, is
easily grown here, and wire fences are
built with but little more cost than in
the Eastern States. Outside or line
fences have here a greater relative val-
ue; for if the farms were all fenced,
horses, cattle, and sheep would get
their living for one-half of the year on
the unoccupied lands, an advantage
that would more than compensate tor
the additional cost of any ordinary
fence. I believe the sole object of
fencing here is to enable a farmer to
take care of his stock cheaper than he
otherwise can. In Vermont, fifteen
years ago, we were continually build-
ing and repairing fences to keep other
people's stock off our farms. It was
not enough that A. should take care of
his own stock, as it certainly was his
interest and duty to do, but he must also
fence against B.'s stock. Now, if B. is
rents to take care of his own stock
as he ought, where is the necessity of
A. fencing against it? While the
fence should have but one object, to
enable a farmer to take care of his
stock, there are many reasons why it
should not be unnecessarily used—the
present high price of material, labor
to build, and annual repairs. It isa
harbor for weeds and vermin. It oc-
cupies considerable land, as the plow
cannot be run close to it. Cross or
subdivision fences make the farming
ing smaller, require a great deal more
time per acre for plowing, harrowing,
cultivating, or reaping with a machine,
as so much time is spent in turning.
Road fences often cause larce snow
drifts in the road where snow falls to
any amount. But granting that the
farmer is only required to fence for his
own stock, how much fencing does he
require ? That depends on the amount
and variety of stock kept, and the cost
of the various modes of taking care of
it. If soiling, herding, or lariating is
cheaper than pasturing, then a barn
lot or corrall is all that is required. 1
do not think one farmer in twenty in
Nebraska has anything more, and
many have not even that. The team
and the cows being fed in the stable or
lariated, while the young cattle are
herded for the season (about 6 months)
at a cost of $1 50 or $2 per head.
In this State, if A.’s stock injures
B.'s crops, B. can hold the stock till
the damage is settled. If they cannot
agree on the amount of damage, they
select arbitrators, and from their decis-
ion there can be no appeal. I have been
in the State eight years, and have only
known of three cases where the arbi-
trators were chosen. I do not think
there is any more ill feeling engendered
here on account of stock injuring crops
than is occasioned by poor fences and
unruly stock in the East. Where
there are no unoccupied grass lands,
and land is not very valuable, pastur-
ing will probably pay best.—C., Lin-
coln, Neb.
We find by compilation of the re-
ports tc thieidepartment of agriculture,
that the cash value of the annual
farm products of the United States, is
over $2,450,000,000, while the value of
all the live stock, including horses,
mules, cattle, sheep and hogs, was, on
the first day of February, 1872, $1,-
659,211,933, or about $800,000,000 less
than the value of the annual farm
To protect this $2,550.000,000 worth
of growing crops from being destroyed
by the 81,6569,211,933 worth of live
stock, we have built 1,619,199,428 rods
of fence enclosing 250,505,614 acres of
ground, with an average of 6.46 rods
per acre, costing $1.08 per rod, or $6.-
98 per acre, making a total cost of $1,-
748,529,185, or about $89,317,192
above the value of all the live stock.
The annual decay and cost of repairs
cannot be less than ten per cent. of
the original cost of fence, or $174,852,
918; interest at seven per cent. per
annum, $124,319,811; total annual
cost, $299,172,729. But this is not all.
A fence occupies and wastes an average
of one half rod wide, or one acre for
every 50 inclosed, making a total for
all the fences of 50,101,123 acres. The
gross proceeds, per acre, for the culti-
vated grounds in the United States for
the year 1871, amounted to £9.78.
Call it $9 per acre, and taking two-
thirds as the cost of cultivation, we
have $3 ae the net proceeds per acre,
which would show an annual loss of
$150,303,369, which, added to the an-
nual cost to settle up and develop the
country, and who have the heaviest
burden of taxes to pay—to expend
more than all the stock in the country
is worth to fenc: in their crops, and
give free range to the stock owners,
who need not own or improve, or pay
taxes upon a single acre. But people
are beginning to believe that when
they have bought a piece of land, and
paid for it, and pay taxes upon it, they
ought to own the land and the crops
growing thereon, and be protected in
their rights to do with it as they
please, providing that noth ing which
they do,or grow,or keep, shall interfere
much more expensive. The fields, be-
with the right of others.